Breaking News: Preferential Voting is Unconstitutional (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 01, 2024, 09:50:49 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Breaking News: Preferential Voting is Unconstitutional (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Breaking News: Preferential Voting is Unconstitutional  (Read 4333 times)
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


« on: December 14, 2004, 11:28:00 PM »

Personally, we need to stop getting bogged down in technicalities. The bill passed. We are in fantasy elections, not the AG's office.

But this could mean a lot, plus StevenNick and Harry could request a revote since they lost because of the preferential voting system.

Absolutely.  When's the Supreme Court gonna recover?  I'm think about starting a revolution, myself.. Smiley
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


« Reply #1 on: December 14, 2004, 11:58:15 PM »
« Edited: December 15, 2004, 12:02:36 AM by SamSpade »

Gabu won the final round tie because he had more first preference votes.

That's what I don't like, if I could quote some parts of a message from WMS on this:

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I actually agree on this.  

In strict constitutional tradition and to limit the power of democracy, I believe that tied races in the Senate should be decided by the regional governors, tied races in the governorship and other smaller regionwide offices should be decided by the senior senator from that region and tied races in the Presidency should be decided by vote of the Senate, with the tiebreaking vote (if necessary) coming from the outgoing (or incoming) VP.
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


« Reply #2 on: December 15, 2004, 02:16:17 PM »

Gabu won the final round tie because he had more first preference votes.

That's what I don't like, if I could quote some parts of a message from WMS on this:

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I actually agree on this. 

In strict constitutional tradition and to limit the power of democracy, I believe that tied races in the Senate should be decided by the regional governors, tied races in the governorship and other smaller regionwide offices should be decided by the senior senator from that region and tied races in the Presidency should be decided by vote of the Senate, with the tiebreaking vote (if necessary) coming from the outgoing (or incoming) VP.

WE DON'T HAVE REGIONAL SENATORS!

*ahem*

However, you'd like the MW constitution because our 3rd tiebreak (after 1st prefs and an instant runoff between only the tied candidates) is a panel of Senators of states representing the Midwest Smiley
Thank you Governor I was just about to say that. Many Districts overlap into several regions, D5 is the most obvious example of this. WE DO NOT HAVE REGIONAL SENATORS thus a governor deciding the winner is not acceptable.

Ok, I didn't understand that.  I am still a little new here.

I would still prefer a election system which takes a certain amount power away from the unwashed masses or the majority (like myself at the point) in a very close election.  I do have no problem with preferential voting, however; I just like some limits on democracy.

Gov. I-Like's system should be used at the first level, not at the third, imo, though it is a good idea.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.03 seconds with 13 queries.